You mean the sort of birth control which isn't the most reliable to start if taken perfectly (who has the time/attention for that?) which leads to a false sense of security and the real possibility of accidental pregnancies? Know what happens to a good number of accidental pregnancies? Abortions.
You're starting from a failed assertion: "If they just didn't have sex, they wouldn't get pregnant!" I think the last few millennia should show the folly in that. People WILL have sex, even if they shouldn't. The drive will not go away. People will do it.
So. Start from the baseline assumption: "These people who don't want to have children are going to have sex. How do we best prevent a pregnancy?"
Heresy! Heresy! Heresy! How dare you question the sanctity of the Armed Forces!
Don't you realize that when someone brings up the military, you're supposed to shut your brain off and just nod to what they say while saluting the flag? That's a Sacred Cow that you never sacrifice in the US.
The Canyon is located inside of the larger Grand Canyon National Park (just as Yosemite Valley is located in the much much larger Yosemite National Park), though even the northern border of the park seems to sit comfortably south of the Utah border. Maybe he's thinking of Monument Valley or Yellowstone.
It also seems like the extremists are the ones who care enough to vote in the primaries, not the moderates. That's when the real decisions are made.
Moderates pay attention to other things during the primary season, then when the then the presidential candidates for the parties are chosen, they don't like who the extremists chose.
Too many repubs conveniently gloss over the facts with their vaunted Reagan. Someone with his record would be considered the worst kind of RINO by the repub base today. If could, I'd be +1'ing this.
Some conservatives are more in love with the Reagan of their mythology than they are the Reagan who was President.
No one should ever negotiate on the debt ceiling. The time to talk about spending too much is when you want to open the wallet and buy things. It's a bit late to for that discussion when your new TV is sitting in the living room and you're wondering if you want to bother paying the credit card bill for it that just arrived.
If you need a jump start then this career isn't for you. Almost all computer people I know Have loved computers the moment they saw or used one. They didn't need a kick in the ass.
Who said it had to be an all-consuming passion and a future career?
You don't send kids to Scout camp on the basis they'll all become Bear Grylls when they grow up.
I've found many "computer people" don't really want to work with people who aren't "computer people."
There's a big difference between the government saying 'remove data X' and a person saying 'remove that post about me' and having the government enforce that person's right to privacy.
At the end, it's still the government saying 'remove data X.' It doesn't matter whether the original desire comes from a private person. Either way, it's still the government forcing the issue.
Hey, "right to be forgotten" backers: you may disagree with the parent, but it is in not way Flamebait. Please don't abuse the moderation system by treating "disagree" as flamebait or troll.
Can you explain why you think Google should be able to violate an individual's privacy for profit?
Because the state has no moral right to tell me what I may or may not remember, or to tell others what factual events have happened in the past. No, someone's "right to privacy" or desire to start afresh cannot override that much more basic and important right.
The US enforces the DMCA world wide on Google search results, for example
The DMCA just makes law what the US has already made agreements on with other countries. Those Chilling Effects are due to trade treaties made with WIPO-adhering countries, and the bigger villains here are the large international treaties that make such repressive laws the law of the land over a wide variety of countries. Google could entirely pull out of the US and settle in Japan and they would be under the same restrictions, since Japan has similar intellectual property laws to the US. Occasionally (likely under international pressure) other countries will pass even more restrictive laws than the US has, and then there's a big rush here, as if people were actually panicked, to "harmonize" the US laws. It's so damned cynical.
This is why it's so important to fight things like the TPP (and sadly, the lost fight against the DMCA) before they become law.
News flash: saying Google is in the right when it comes to shitty EU laws does not make you a Google shill. Nor does working at Google at some point in your life. I know I've certainly badmouthed my (bad) former employers enough...
The level of fear-mongering, ignorance, outright lies, and sometimes spittle-flecked hatred is so disturbing that it's taken all the fun out of mocking right wing science-deniers. And occasionally it descends to violence, like the assholes who destroyed the Golden Rice (note: not a Monsanto product) plot in the Philippines.
The actual debates over Golden Rice and the Rainbow Papaya give a depressing look at how much the goalposts are moved in the debates too.
G: "Golden Rice, fortified with beta carotene, could save 40,000 lives a day!" A: "It might not be poison this time, but it doesn't produce enough beta carotene, so it's useless. Don't use it. Cultivate a home garden, ghetto kids!" G: "It's not feasible to suggest that these dirt-poor people with no yards or houses grow beans and pumpkins." A: "Well they can't afford yellow rice." G: "Most of it will be given to farmers for free." A: "Oh, that's terrible, it will contaminate local food supplies!" G: "You're right, it didn't have enough beta carotene. Here's a new version that has far more beta carotene." A: "Well that's a problem, beta carotene and Vitamin A are dangerous. They can cause direct toxicity or abnormal embryonic development." G: "Only one study showed problems with Vitamin A, and you'd have to 20 bowls of golden rice to ingest the same level." A: "The National Research Council says genetic engineering has a higher chance of introducing unanticipated changes." G: "The NRC said it had higher change of introducing changes like narrow crosses, but a lower chance of introducing other more dangerous changes." A: "Some retinoids derived from beta carotene cause birth defects." G: "Every leafy green vegetable has these retinoids. You said people should grow their own food." A: "Keeping rice GMO-free is an issue of consumer choice and human rights. Genetic Engineering is controlled by multinational corporations and governments. Governments forcing this is bad." G: "But how to solve the deficiency problem?" A: "We recommend the plan to make Vitamin A fortification compulsory. And mix it in with the staples of sugar, flour, and margarine. The Philippines made that law and it worked there. Governments forcing that is good." G: "But those contained the retinoids that you said--" A: "Sorry, I was busy protesting China's clinical trials, where Golden Rice was fed to 24 children! Children! It's never been tested in animals, and we know that retinoids that can be derived from beta carotene are toxic and cause birth defects."
Oh, reality bites, huh? So why was the Afghan war fought even after Bin Laden was killed?
Because the United States was not at war with Bin Laden, it was at war with Al Qaeda, of whom Bin Laden was the head. Killing Bin Laden does not kill his terrorist networks.
but the economic one is flat out ideological and has almost exclusively gone to whoever shouted loudest for banking deregulation. The only exception in its entire history was Keynes
I agree with most of that, but Paul Krugman got an economic Nobel, and as far as I can tell he's pretty strongly on the pro-regulation side. Mostly that current regulations are ineffective. He criticized Greenspan (before the housing crash) for not regulating housing markets, and he's argued that not only should financial innovation be regulated, but that financial industry profits should be more heavily taxed.
Nat Geo is listed at "slipped" on TV Tropes's excellent Network Decay page. "The channel still shows programming related to its original concept, although it is significantly showing programming not related to their genre in some way."
"The National Geographic Society's website features the slogan "Inspiring People to Care About the Planet"; how exactly they're accomplishing this with The Dog Whisperer, Locked Up Abroad, Is It Real? and shows about bounty hunters is left as an exercise for the viewer. It doesn't help that Locked Up Abroad is a case of both tourists doing things that border on moronic (hence why the end up as in the title) and portraying countries that aren't Anglo-American as virtual hellholes."
There are some excellent articles in the Grauniad about how doctors tend to forego treatment when they know the game is up, because it tends to provide suffering when all one really needs in the last few months of their life is comfort. It is laypeople who are desperate to squeeze out that last minute of life, even when it's entirely without quality.
Jobs was no idiot, and if avoiding things that didn't work in his case while a bit of peaceful woowoo kept him from losing his mind while he was losing his body, I wouldn't hold it against him. I wouldn't hold it against any terminal cancer patient, just like I wouldn't hold it against them to watch the sun rise and imagine flying to the stars before they're drowned out by the new day.
That's kindof the opposite that happened in Jobs's case. He went woo for the first nine months after the initial diagnosis. When his confidants finally managed to convince him this was idiotic, he went full-scientific-treatment and managed to live another eight years. However, that 9 months when his cancer was allowed to spread virtually unimpeded was fatal, as it had spread to his pancreas.
Are you confusing homeopathic remedies with alternative medicine as a whole? Homeopathy is the dilution of substance until there there is nothing left of the original substance. You say the ingredients may have beneficial properties, but there is nothing of that original ingredient remaining. Are you suggesting beneficial properties of -other- substances added to the homeopathic water? Well, that's certainly possible, but at that point I don't think you could call it a homeopathic remedy.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean the sort of birth control which isn't the most reliable to start if taken perfectly (who has the time/attention for that?) which leads to a false sense of security and the real possibility of accidental pregnancies? Know what happens to a good number of accidental pregnancies? Abortions.
You're starting from a failed assertion: "If they just didn't have sex, they wouldn't get pregnant!" I think the last few millennia should show the folly in that. People WILL have sex, even if they shouldn't. The drive will not go away. People will do it.
So. Start from the baseline assumption: "These people who don't want to have children are going to have sex. How do we best prevent a pregnancy?"
Heresy! Heresy! Heresy! How dare you question the sanctity of the Armed Forces!
Don't you realize that when someone brings up the military, you're supposed to shut your brain off and just nod to what they say while saluting the flag?
That's a Sacred Cow that you never sacrifice in the US.
Actually, they lose their livelihood because one person blocks 535 people from passing laws. He lives in the White House.
If Congress says "pass the bill that we want or we'll shut down the rest of the government," it's not the President's fault when they do so.
The Canyon is located inside of the larger Grand Canyon National Park (just as Yosemite Valley is located in the much much larger Yosemite National Park), though even the northern border of the park seems to sit comfortably south of the Utah border.
Maybe he's thinking of Monument Valley or Yellowstone.
It also seems like the extremists are the ones who care enough to vote in the primaries, not the moderates. That's when the real decisions are made.
Moderates pay attention to other things during the primary season, then when the then the presidential candidates for the parties are chosen, they don't like who the extremists chose.
Too many repubs conveniently gloss over the facts with their vaunted Reagan. Someone with his record would be considered the worst kind of RINO by the repub base today. If could, I'd be +1'ing this.
Some conservatives are more in love with the Reagan of their mythology than they are the Reagan who was President.
No one should ever negotiate on the debt ceiling. The time to talk about spending too much is when you want to open the wallet and buy things. It's a bit late to for that discussion when your new TV is sitting in the living room and you're wondering if you want to bother paying the credit card bill for it that just arrived.
If you need a jump start then this career isn't for you. Almost all computer people I know Have loved computers the moment they saw or used one. They didn't need a kick in the ass.
Who said it had to be an all-consuming passion and a future career?
You don't send kids to Scout camp on the basis they'll all become Bear Grylls when they grow up.
I've found many "computer people" don't really want to work with people who aren't "computer people."
If your only argument is to nit-pick the semantics of a post, then the other person has already won.
It seemed like the particulars were the whole point of the post. If they don't add up, the whole post is meaningless.
Addicts always make up stories to justify themselves. It's _always_ someone else's fault.
Aren't you being a little insensitive towards their "disease" that of course they have no control over?
This post is perfect satire.
There's a big difference between the government saying 'remove data X' and a person saying 'remove that post about me' and having the government enforce that person's right to privacy.
At the end, it's still the government saying 'remove data X.' It doesn't matter whether the original desire comes from a private person. Either way, it's still the government forcing the issue.
Because that's not how French privacy laws work.
The original news story still remains. Deleting it would violate freedom of the press, and would make it inaccessible for all purposes.
So the politicians are trying to have their cake and eat it too. But they can't.
Hey, "right to be forgotten" backers: you may disagree with the parent, but it is in not way Flamebait. Please don't abuse the moderation system by treating "disagree" as flamebait or troll.
Can you explain why you think Google should be able to violate an individual's privacy for profit?
Because the state has no moral right to tell me what I may or may not remember, or to tell others what factual events have happened in the past. No, someone's "right to privacy" or desire to start afresh cannot override that much more basic and important right.
The US enforces the DMCA world wide on Google search results, for example
The DMCA just makes law what the US has already made agreements on with other countries. Those Chilling Effects are due to trade treaties made with WIPO-adhering countries, and the bigger villains here are the large international treaties that make such repressive laws the law of the land over a wide variety of countries. Google could entirely pull out of the US and settle in Japan and they would be under the same restrictions, since Japan has similar intellectual property laws to the US. Occasionally (likely under international pressure) other countries will pass even more restrictive laws than the US has, and then there's a big rush here, as if people were actually panicked, to "harmonize" the US laws. It's so damned cynical.
This is why it's so important to fight things like the TPP (and sadly, the lost fight against the DMCA) before they become law.
News flash: saying Google is in the right when it comes to shitty EU laws does not make you a Google shill.
Nor does working at Google at some point in your life. I know I've certainly badmouthed my (bad) former employers enough...
Doesn't tlambert deserve the right to be forgotten?
No. No one "deserves" the "right to be forgotten."
The level of fear-mongering, ignorance, outright lies, and sometimes spittle-flecked hatred is so disturbing that it's taken all the fun out of mocking right wing science-deniers. And occasionally it descends to violence, like the assholes who destroyed the Golden Rice (note: not a Monsanto product) plot in the Philippines.
The actual debates over Golden Rice and the Rainbow Papaya give a depressing look at how much the goalposts are moved in the debates too.
G: "Golden Rice, fortified with beta carotene, could save 40,000 lives a day!"
A: "It might not be poison this time, but it doesn't produce enough beta carotene, so it's useless. Don't use it. Cultivate a home garden, ghetto kids!"
G: "It's not feasible to suggest that these dirt-poor people with no yards or houses grow beans and pumpkins."
A: "Well they can't afford yellow rice."
G: "Most of it will be given to farmers for free."
A: "Oh, that's terrible, it will contaminate local food supplies!"
G: "You're right, it didn't have enough beta carotene. Here's a new version that has far more beta carotene."
A: "Well that's a problem, beta carotene and Vitamin A are dangerous. They can cause direct toxicity or abnormal embryonic development."
G: "Only one study showed problems with Vitamin A, and you'd have to 20 bowls of golden rice to ingest the same level."
A: "The National Research Council says genetic engineering has a higher chance of introducing unanticipated changes."
G: "The NRC said it had higher change of introducing changes like narrow crosses, but a lower chance of introducing other more dangerous changes."
A: "Some retinoids derived from beta carotene cause birth defects."
G: "Every leafy green vegetable has these retinoids. You said people should grow their own food."
A: "Keeping rice GMO-free is an issue of consumer choice and human rights. Genetic Engineering is controlled by multinational corporations and governments. Governments forcing this is bad."
G: "But how to solve the deficiency problem?"
A: "We recommend the plan to make Vitamin A fortification compulsory. And mix it in with the staples of sugar, flour, and margarine. The Philippines made that law and it worked there. Governments forcing that is good."
G: "But those contained the retinoids that you said--"
A: "Sorry, I was busy protesting China's clinical trials, where Golden Rice was fed to 24 children! Children! It's never been tested in animals, and we know that retinoids that can be derived from beta carotene are toxic and cause birth defects."
The arguments are circular. There is no winning.
* (Mostly taken from this excellent Slate article. )
Oh, reality bites, huh? So why was the Afghan war fought even after Bin Laden was killed?
Because the United States was not at war with Bin Laden, it was at war with Al Qaeda, of whom Bin Laden was the head. Killing Bin Laden does not kill his terrorist networks.
but the economic one is flat out ideological and has almost exclusively gone to whoever shouted loudest for banking deregulation.
The only exception in its entire history was Keynes
I agree with most of that, but Paul Krugman got an economic Nobel, and as far as I can tell he's pretty strongly on the pro-regulation side. Mostly that current regulations are ineffective. He criticized Greenspan (before the housing crash) for not regulating housing markets, and he's argued that not only should financial innovation be regulated, but that financial industry profits should be more heavily taxed.
Nat Geo is listed at "slipped" on TV Tropes's excellent Network Decay page. "The channel still shows programming related to its original concept, although it is significantly showing programming not related to their genre in some way."
"The National Geographic Society's website features the slogan "Inspiring People to Care About the Planet"; how exactly they're accomplishing this with The Dog Whisperer, Locked Up Abroad, Is It Real? and shows about bounty hunters is left as an exercise for the viewer. It doesn't help that Locked Up Abroad is a case of both tourists doing things that border on moronic (hence why the end up as in the title) and portraying countries that aren't Anglo-American as virtual hellholes."
Really makes me miss the Hitler Channel.
There are some excellent articles in the Grauniad about how doctors tend to forego treatment when they know the game is up, because it tends to provide suffering when all one really needs in the last few months of their life is comfort. It is laypeople who are desperate to squeeze out that last minute of life, even when it's entirely without quality.
Jobs was no idiot, and if avoiding things that didn't work in his case while a bit of peaceful woowoo kept him from losing his mind while he was losing his body, I wouldn't hold it against him. I wouldn't hold it against any terminal cancer patient, just like I wouldn't hold it against them to watch the sun rise and imagine flying to the stars before they're drowned out by the new day.
That's kindof the opposite that happened in Jobs's case. He went woo for the first nine months after the initial diagnosis. When his confidants finally managed to convince him this was idiotic, he went full-scientific-treatment and managed to live another eight years. However, that 9 months when his cancer was allowed to spread virtually unimpeded was fatal, as it had spread to his pancreas.
Pretty sure he meant that "actual full science" could have just been reduced to "science" and retain the same meaning.
Are you confusing homeopathic remedies with alternative medicine as a whole? Homeopathy is the dilution of substance until there there is nothing left of the original substance. You say the ingredients may have beneficial properties, but there is nothing of that original ingredient remaining. Are you suggesting beneficial properties of -other- substances added to the homeopathic water? Well, that's certainly possible, but at that point I don't think you could call it a homeopathic remedy.